• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Kamala Harris Election Campaign

Ziggurat said:
Oh dear. You seem to think those "receipts" mean a whole lot more than they actually do. So do the people who were convinced that they would nail Bill Clinton with them. There was a whole thread on the topic, and pretty much the unanimous conclusion was that it was a nothing burger. See the thread for more details.

But keep dreaming that dream. Shine on, you diamond.
Click to expand...

Not the old manifest from January. That was just a list of people mentioned in conversations around Epstein.
 
Donal said:
The press is also doing a better job, although they still have a ways to go.
Click to expand...

In what way? We have no interviews yet. She has no policies promoted and has faced no tough question inquiring into why or about them. That is not a healthy position for the press.

Segnosaur said:
The press in general wants to be seen as unbiased.

Now, Trump was clearly the worse candidate, but they didn't want it to be in a 24/7 "attack Trump all the time" situation, so they dutifully reported on various anti-Clinton stories, even when it was likely those stories didn't actually mean anything.
Click to expand...

There is difference in reporting something to dispel the implication or to find out if it has substance. If you watch current cable news, there is far more of the former than the latter when it comes to democrats. It's like Jake Tappers interview with Welz where he highlights general liberal policy hes passed and asks if he thinks it will help or hurt him with Trump. It's endorsement, not reporting.

Donal said:
What gets me is how they didn't even have a contingency for this. Did they forget Harris was VP and most likely to step in if Biden dropped out? Even if it did devolve into the **** show we all feared, she would still be the front runner. Plus, she was a senator. They should have already had volumes of oppo on her. What happened to that vaunted insitute for researching every possible opponent the Republicans used to have?
Click to expand...

She is wisely remaining a chameleon that can fill the void of whatever voters believe her to be. This would not be possible with a normal situation as the primary would have forced her to reveal this stuff already. Now the talking line seems to be that obviously we will have to wait for the convention for her policy positions to be revealed. Complete nonsense but is working for her so can't blame them.
 
Donal said:
What gets me is how they didn't even have a contingency for this. Did they forget Harris was VP and most likely to step in if Biden dropped out? Even if it did devolve into the **** show we all feared, she would still be the front runner. Plus, she was a senator. They should have already had volumes of oppo on her. What happened to that vaunted insitute for researching every possible opponent the Republicans used to have?
Click to expand...
Harris is a woman and brown-ish, naturally the Orange Rapist underestimated her.
 
rdwight said:
In what way? We have no interviews yet. She has no policies promoted and has faced no tough question inquiring into why or about them. That is not a healthy position for the press.

There is difference in reporting something to dispel the implication or to find out if it has substance. If you watch current cable news, there is far more of the former than the latter when it comes to democrats. It's like Jake Tappers interview with Welz where he highlights general liberal policy hes passed and asks if he thinks it will help or hurt him with Trump. It's endorsement, not reporting.

She is wisely remaining a chameleon that can fill the void of whatever voters believe her to be. This would not be possible with a normal situation as the primary would have forced her to reveal this stuff already. Now the talking line seems to be that obviously we will have to wait for the convention for her policy positions to be revealed. Complete nonsense but is working for her so can't blame them.
Click to expand...

No offense, but that's all nonsense. If you want to know her background or policy positions all you have to do is go to the Harris website.

You don't really get that much in interviews and some politicians (not naming names) will lie all the way through them. And in some interviews all I see are reporters attempt to play gotcha like CNN tried to do with Fetterman the other day.

My problem with reporting is far too often they either go into an interview with their own agenda or they ignore the fact that a candidate lies from beginning to end. Good reporting isn't spreading misinformation.
 
acbytesla said:
No offense, but that's all nonsense. If you want to know her background or policy positions all you have to do is go to the Harris website.

You don't really get that much in interviews and some politicians (not naming names) will lie all the way through them. And in some interviews all I see are reporters attempt to play gotcha like CNN tried to do with Fetterman the other day.
My problem with reporting is far too often they either go into an interview with their own agenda or they ignore the fact that a candidate lies from beginning to end. Good reporting isn't spreading misinformation.
Click to expand...

Do you have a reference for this? I'm not familiar with it but would like to read\watch it if you can track it down.
 
plague311 said:
Do you have a reference for this? I'm not familiar with it but would like to read\watch it if you can track it down.
Click to expand...

It's really not worth your time. The reporter suggested that Fetterman sandbagged Shapiro during the vetting of the VP candidates. He implied there was some feud between Fetterman and Shapiro. Fetterman denied the substance and was annoyed that instead of talking about Walz the reporter was looking for disharmony.
 
acbytesla said:
It's really not worth your time. The reporter suggested that Fetterman sandbagged Shapiro during the vetting of the VP candidates. He implied there was some feud between Fetterman and Shapiro. Fetterman denied the substance and was annoyed that instead of talking about Walz the reporter was looking for disharmony.
Click to expand...

Got ya, thanks for the summup!
 
arthwollipot said:
How many times, and what years?
Click to expand...
Just catching up with the thread.
In case this still matters, I recall the coverage at the time referring to a runway appearance at a fashion show as an “oops” pic and “wardrobe malfunction.” AFAIK that’s it. But if she is on the campaign team I can see her generating eyeballs a-plenty,
 
theprestige said:
You ask someone for a reference and then thank them for telling you that you don't need a reference? If you trust them that unquestioningly, why did you even ask them for a reference in the first place?
Click to expand...

Because there is trust of acbytesla.

Body of work.
 
acbytesla said:
No offense, but that's all nonsense. If you want to know her background or policy positions all you have to do is go to the Harris website.
Click to expand...

Go to her website. Quote me a single policy proposal she has for her presidency. I don't need to know her background. I don't need to know that she was VP during xyz. I need to know what she plans to do in the office she is running for today. This is not difficult to understand. I should not have to read between the lines and fill in with guesses.

How will she differ in policy vs Biden on Israel, immigration, healthcare? What is her plan for offsetting the tax increase created by the expiring tax cuts? I mean this is basic stuff. Not fringe academic papers where "do your own research lol" will suffice. It's a campaign for president.

acbytesla said:
You don't really get that much in interviews and some politicians (not naming names) will lie all the way through them. And in some interviews all I see are reporters attempt to play gotcha like CNN tried to do with Fetterman the other day.

My problem with reporting is far too often they either go into an interview with their own agenda or they ignore the fact that a candidate lies from beginning to end. Good reporting isn't spreading misinformation.
Click to expand...

An hour long debate basically pushed Biden, who said it would take sign from God not to run, to drop out. Long form interviews, even with friendly reporters gives voters much more information than campaign trail speeches. It forces candidates to express their opinions, and with any luck explain positions on policies others disagree with. There is no downside for voters.
 
theprestige said:
You ask someone for a reference and then thank them for telling you that you don't need a reference? If you trust them that unquestioningly, why did you even ask them for a reference in the first place?
Click to expand...

Because some people here can be depended on to know what they're talking about. On the other hand, then there's people like you.
 
rdwight said:
Go to her website. Quote me a single policy proposal she has for her presidency. I don't need to know her background. I don't need to know that she was VP during xyz. I need to know what she plans to do in the office she is running for today. This is not difficult to understand. I should not have to read between the lines and fill in with guesses.

How will she differ in policy vs Biden on Israel, immigration, healthcare? What is her plan for offsetting the tax increase created by the expiring tax cuts? I mean this is basic stuff. Not fringe academic papers where "do your own research lol" will suffice. It's a campaign for president.



An hour long debate basically pushed Biden, who said it would take sign from God not to run, to drop out. Long form interviews, even with friendly reporters gives voters much more information than campaign trail speeches. It forces candidates to express their opinions, and with any luck explain positions on policies others disagree with. There is no downside for voters.
Click to expand...

LOL!!!

MAGA says "we dont know what Kamala wants to do if she wins".

:dl:
 
acbytesla said:
Fine it's not on the website as of yet. But let's not pretend her policy positions are a mystery.

There is a detailed list of Harris's policy positions on Wikipedia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Kamala_Harris
Click to expand...

I gave you three easy specific questions, of which you keep acting like the information is at my fingertips but I ignore it. Her history is not a framework for her plans. Take immigration. The only proposal for action as president in that write up is from 2018 and refers to legislation for dreamers to obtain deportation protection and faster green cards. The rest is just as old with non descript positions about the treatment of those detained by ICE.

Do you think that is the current information we need from her about her plans for immigration? Not only is it outdated, it's useless for the issues people actually want to know about.

I assume you are far more informed than the average voter. And the best you can do to defend your position is a wiki that lacks any info. You can just admit you also do not know her policy positions yet.

Hercules56 said:
LOL!!!

MAGA says "we dont know what Kamala wants to do if she wins".

:dl:
Click to expand...

Solid contribution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom